Apply Now!

The Trump Card...

muttly

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
RLENT said:
Oh I doubt that they'll have to do that.

;)



Might not be quite as "cut and dry" as you seen to think:





A court just struck down Pennsylvania’s mail voting law. Here’s what you need to know

Seems like another three Republican judges have been caught, yet again acting in bad faith, to make it harder - unnecessarily harder - for qualified citizens to cast their ballots and vote.
Click to expand...
Not really. They’re making it harder to cheat.
Also, the dissenting opinion by the Dem judges misinterpreted the constitution’s stipulation:
“All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law.”
The other method could not be a paper mail-in ballot because the first part of the sentence mentions (paper) ballot already. It would have to be another method other than a paper ballot, like machines.
The Pa. Supreme Court ruled two times in cases so there is precedent that the voters decide in changing the constitution.
But the Dem Supreme Court judges will ignore all of this though and pull something out of their…
 
Last edited:
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
muttly said:
I was speaking specifically about the alternate electors issue. Not the Jan6 “investigation”. (The Dems stupidly forging ahead trying to put people in jail for years for having alternate electors ready in case the courts ruled in their favor. It’s just incredibly dumb to pursue this.)
Click to expand...

The "alternate electors" issue is part and parcel of the Jan 6th investigation.

Trump had a plan to overthrow a legitimate election and execute an illegal coup.

There were many moving parts to the plan.

muttly said:
There are also many republicans that want an investigate too. Like security breakdowns involving Pelosi, the number of informants and how much they instigated the riots along with the fake Trump supporters that dressed up like ones and caused problems.
Click to expand...

Sounds like unhinged rantings from the extreme right.

Basically a Jan 6th-GHAZI !!!

:tearsofjoy:

muttly said:
And a thorough investigation into the killing of the unarmed protester Ashli Babbitt instead of the whitewash rubber stamp review that they did with Lt. Byrd.
Click to expand...

Explain to us all what specifically that would involve - that hasn't been done already.
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
muttly said:
Not really. They’re making it harder to cheat.
Click to expand...

Nah ... that's just rubric/pretext that gets used ... but it's a lie.

Republicans are definitely not for every qualified citizen voting.

muttly said:
Also the dissenting opinion by the Dem judges misinterpreted the constitution stipulation:
“All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law.” The other method could not be a paper mail-in ballot because the first part of the sentence mentions (paper) ballot already.
Click to expand...

Nice try but ... #FAIL.

And you even quoted the actual relevant text of PA Constitution:

All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law: Provided, That secrecy in voting be preserved.
Click to expand...

Nothing whatsoever in there about a paper ballot.

:tearsofjoy:

muttly said:
The Pa. Supreme Court ruled in two times in cases so there is precedent that the voters decide in changing the constitution.
Click to expand...

So what ?

How is that relevant to our discussion here ?

Make your argument (and maybe cite the cases you are referring to above)

muttly said:
But the Dem Supreme judges will ignore all of this though.
Click to expand...

Sure ...

:tearsofjoy:
 
muttly

muttly

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
RLENT said:
Nah ... that's just rubric/pretext that gets used ... but it's a lie.

Republicans are definitely not for every qualified citizen voting.



Nice try but ... #FAIL.

And you even quoted the actual relevant text of PA Constitution:



Nothing whatsoever in there about a paper ballot.

:tearsofjoy:



So what ?

How is that relevant to our discussion here ?

Make your argument (and maybe cite the cases you are referring to above)



Sure ...

:tearsofjoy:
Click to expand...

RLENT said:
Nah ... that's just rubric/pretext that gets used ... but it's a lie.

Republicans are definitely not for every qualified citizen voting.



Nice try but ... #FAIL.

And you even quoted the actual relevant text of PA Constitution:



Nothing whatsoever in there about a paper ballot.

:tearsofjoy:



So what ?

How is that relevant to our discussion here ?

Make your argument (and maybe cite the cases you are referring to above)



Sure ...

:tearsofjoy:
Click to expand...
Chase and Lancaster City are the two court cases.
Also, the method of voting was by paper ballot, until “other methods” like machines began to be used. So yes, the reference to ballots was paper ballots.
8C51750E-13E3-41BC-8E99-C2923747D1F3.jpegBEAF1E89-AD8E-4CF9-B384-3CA4F659A6E9.jpegF74096EB-D9AC-490F-9ACB-D82FE06EFD00.jpeg
 
RLENT

RLENT

Veteran Expediter
muttly said:
Oh. I thought you read it.
Click to expand...

You would.

:tearsofjoy:

The real point however was this little habit of posting screenshots without referencing/citing/linking their source.

Given the selectivity in choosing what is posted and the absence of any identification of where it came from, it almost seems like an conscious effort to obscure the source (along with the remainder of whatever source contains)

You might as well be posting memes ...

:tearsofjoy:
 
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
RLENT said:
You would.

:tearsofjoy:

The real point however was this little habit of posting screenshots without referencing/citing/linking their source.

Given the selectivity in choosing what is posted and the absence of any identification of where it came from, it almost seems like an conscious effort to obscure the source (along with the remainder of whatever source contains)

You might as well be posting memes ...

:tearsofjoy:
Click to expand...
When you try to make points with no evidence, it serves people better to do what you describe above. They think they are making points but in fact are just making noise.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Ragman, muttly and RLENT
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Working Their Way up the Ladder

With hundreds of witnesses already interviewed and thousands of pages of documents already received, the House select committee continues its work, moving up the ladder to higher-level witnesses. Now they are hearing from at least one man (Marc Short) who was in the room with Trump during certain meetings of interest to the committee.

(CNN) "Marc Short, former Vice President Mike Pence's chief of staff, quietly testified before the House select committee investigating January 6 last week in response to a subpoena, sources tell CNN, in the most significant sign to date that Pence's team is cooperating with the probe.

Short, who was with Pence at the Capitol on January 6, 2021, and participated in a critical White House meeting on January 4, 2021, is seen as a potentially crucial witness in the committee's investigation as the panel pieces together the pressure campaign then-President Donald Trump and his allies waged to try to convince Pence not to certify the presidential election ..."

The committee does not prosecute. It is using its subpoena power to gather information that will likely be made public and also referred to the Department of Justice Department so certain people can be investigated and charged if appropriate.

While the above story relies on unnamed sources, this reported committee appearance is reliably confirmed. The idea that Pence's team is cooperating with the probe rings true with me. Some time ago, I saw an interview of one Pence team member who said Pence team members have a strong sense of propriety and the subpoenas make it proper for them to testify before the committee.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: muttly, RLENT and Ragman
Pilgrim

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
muttly said:
The PA. appellate court has spoken: It was unconstitutional.
Victory for the side of people who believe in the PA. constitution.View attachment 21207
Click to expand...
This op-ed came out a few days ago and helps explain the Republican side of this issue and reminds us of some details of the questionable legislative activity that went on in PA during the 2020 election. There were a number of legal analysts who said at the time that the PA Supreme Court was getting out of their lane by making changes in voting laws that only the PA voters were allowed to do. (Bold emphasis mine)

"Let’s start with the Supreme Court. On September 17, 2020, in direct contravention of the wording of Act 77, the court extended the deadline for mailed ballots to be received from Election Day, to three days after Election Day. Then the court declared that “just for the 2020 general election”, ballots mailed without a postmark should be presumed to have been received on time. Lastly, the court mandated that mail-in ballots lacking a verified signature were to be accepted. This meant that any ballot, without a signature, without a postal mark would be counted, even if received three days after the election. This policy making by the court opened up Pandora’s Box for uncertainty in the outcome of the election.

Not to be outdone, Secretary of State Boockvar took it upon herself to join in on the hijacking of Act 77 in late October 2020. Boockvar issued guidance directed only to certain counties to “cure” defective ballots. This allowed voting officials in those counties to correct ballots so that they could be counted.

Boockvar dishonestly told the Supreme Court that mail-in ballots received after the November 3 election would be set aside, pending an appeal to nullify ballots collected in the days after the election. However, the Secretary then told counties to tabulate the ballots as quickly as possible, co-mingling ballots received by Election Day with those received after. To this date, we don’t know how many late arriving ballots ended up being tabulated in the final results."
senatormastriano.com

Op-Ed: How Pennsylvania Democrats Hijacked Act 77 - Senator Mastriano

In October 2019, Senate leadership brought SB 421 (later Act 77) to the full floor for a vote. I was in my fourth month as a Senator after a career of serving 30 years in the US Army.
senatormastriano.com senatormastriano.com

If Act 77 had remained in place unaltered during the 2020 election, would the results have been different? Nobody knows - but keep in mind that Biden put PA over the top with 1,995,691 mail-in votes compared to Trump's 595,538. Comparing that result to the overall vote split, it any wonder that Republicans in PA questioned that Trump won only 23% of the mail-in votes?

MSN

www.msn.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: muttly
ATeam

ATeam

Senior Member
Retired Expediter
Ragman said:
Here's a good one.....
The Trumpeter says Pence should be investigated.
Click to expand...
That's good news for Pence. Before, Trump said nothing when his supporters were roaming the Capitol hallways looking to hang Mike Pence. Now all he wants to do is investigate Pence. Trump must be mellowing out in his old age.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLENT and Ragman
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top